On Wednesday 18 April 2012, Marek Vasut wrote:
> arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h | 4 ++> arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig | 3 +> arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile | 1 +> arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++> arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/devices-common.h | 9 +++> 5 files changed, 95 insertions(+)> create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c
What's the state of the device tree support for mach-mxs now? Since we
allow booting at least the mx28evk with device tree now in -next, it
would be really nice if we didn't have to add this registration code
for non-DT platforms any more and just mandate that everyone who
wants to use USB on that board uses DT. Is that possible already
or are we missing too much other stuff?
Arnd

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:51:46AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 April 2012, Marek Vasut wrote:> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h | 4 ++> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig | 3 +> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile | 1 +> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++> > arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/devices-common.h | 9 +++> > 5 files changed, 95 insertions(+)> > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c> > What's the state of the device tree support for mach-mxs now?
The pinctrl-mxs (DT only) was just posted today. The gpio-mxs will
be the next one I will work on, and I think Dong Aisheng is adding
DT support for mxs-dma and mxs-mmc. I believe we will reach a pretty
good state when in the v3.5 merge window.
> Since we> allow booting at least the mx28evk with device tree now in -next, it> would be really nice if we didn't have to add this registration code> for non-DT platforms any more and just mandate that everyone who> wants to use USB on that board uses DT.
I share the same view on this.
Regards,
Shawn
> Is that possible already> or are we missing too much other stuff?>

Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:51:46AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:> > On Wednesday 18 April 2012, Marek Vasut wrote:> > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices-mx28.h | 4 ++> > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Kconfig | 3 +> > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/Makefile | 1 +> > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c | 78> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++> > > arch/arm/mach-mxs/include/mach/devices-common.h | 9 +++> > > 5 files changed, 95 insertions(+)> > > create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-mxs/devices/platform-usb.c> > > > What's the state of the device tree support for mach-mxs now?> > The pinctrl-mxs (DT only) was just posted today. The gpio-mxs will> be the next one I will work on, and I think Dong Aisheng is adding> DT support for mxs-dma and mxs-mmc. I believe we will reach a pretty> good state when in the v3.5 merge window.
This is very good to hear, I'm really interested to see this development :)
> > Since we> > allow booting at least the mx28evk with device tree now in -next, it> > would be really nice if we didn't have to add this registration code> > for non-DT platforms any more and just mandate that everyone who> > wants to use USB on that board uses DT.> > I share the same view on this.
The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in there.
Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point disallowing this
(and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into kernel so more people can
test it only because you'd like this to wait for who knows how long for the DT
support to arrive. Don't take it personally, but I still believe it's too early
to enforce DT on MXS.
> Regards,> Shawn> > > Is that possible already> > or are we missing too much other stuff?
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in there. > Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point disallowing this > (and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into kernel so more people can > test it only because you'd like this to wait for who knows how long for the DT > support to arrive. Don't take it personally, but I still believe it's too early > to enforce DT on MXS.>
Let me put it another way. When you have drivers/usb changes hit
mainline, while there is still something not ripe for mxs DT support
while stops you adding DT support for usb driver, you have good reason
to ask me take the arch/arm/mach-mxs changes in this series then.

Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:> > The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in> > there. Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point> > disallowing this (and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into> > kernel so more people can test it only because you'd like this to wait> > for who knows how long for the DT support to arrive. Don't take it> > personally, but I still believe it's too early to enforce DT on MXS.> > Let me put it another way. When you have drivers/usb changes hit> mainline, while there is still something not ripe for mxs DT support> while stops you adding DT support for usb driver, you have good reason> to ask me take the arch/arm/mach-mxs changes in this series then.
Yes, I'm quite aware this stuff might take a bit to get into mainline shape. I
grouped this and MXS SPI together, maybe the MXS SPI stuff is a better
representation of what I had in mind (about letting non-DT stuff for mxs slide
in).
Best regards,
Marek Vasut

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 02:56:50AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Shawn Guo,> > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:> > > The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in> > > there. Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point> > > disallowing this (and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into> > > kernel so more people can test it only because you'd like this to wait> > > for who knows how long for the DT support to arrive. Don't take it> > > personally, but I still believe it's too early to enforce DT on MXS.> > > > Let me put it another way. When you have drivers/usb changes hit> > mainline, while there is still something not ripe for mxs DT support> > while stops you adding DT support for usb driver, you have good reason> > to ask me take the arch/arm/mach-mxs changes in this series then.> > Yes, I'm quite aware this stuff might take a bit to get into mainline shape. I > grouped this and MXS SPI together, maybe the MXS SPI stuff is a better > representation of what I had in mind (about letting non-DT stuff for mxs slide > in).>
I gave Fabio the same comment on his SPI patch.

Dear Shawn Guo,
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 02:56:50AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:> > Dear Shawn Guo,> > > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:32:56PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:> > > > The Device Tree code for MXS is not ripe yet. We still miss a lot in> > > > there. Flipping this usb stuff to DT should be easy, I see no point> > > > disallowing this (and that stands also for the MXS SPI actually) into> > > > kernel so more people can test it only because you'd like this to> > > > wait for who knows how long for the DT support to arrive. Don't take> > > > it personally, but I still believe it's too early to enforce DT on> > > > MXS.> > > > > > Let me put it another way. When you have drivers/usb changes hit> > > mainline, while there is still something not ripe for mxs DT support> > > while stops you adding DT support for usb driver, you have good reason> > > to ask me take the arch/arm/mach-mxs changes in this series then.> > > > Yes, I'm quite aware this stuff might take a bit to get into mainline> > shape. I grouped this and MXS SPI together, maybe the MXS SPI stuff is a> > better representation of what I had in mind (about letting non-DT stuff> > for mxs slide in).> > I gave Fabio the same comment on his SPI patch.
Well, let's see how it turns out, I have some questions for Sascha and after I
sort these out, I'll send V4 of these
Best regards,
Marek Vasut